Operator overloading through UFCS doesn't work

[Timon Gehr]

On 10/14/2012 09:14 AM, Maxim Fomin wrote:
> On Sunday, 14 October 2012 at 07:01:30 UTC, Tommi wrote:
>> Actually, it seems that alias this has precedence over UFCS. So, a
>> free function opUnary wouldn't ever suit better than an actual method
>> opUnary of the thing referred to by that alias this.
>
> http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/d0a4431d
>
> Free function doesn't suit better than actual method. The issue is
> absence of the actual method.
>
> opUnary method has priority over alias this, which does make sense
> because alias this is chosen only when it is impossible to apply
> operation over A type. If this request is approved and compiler has
> opUnary definition outside type (which suits better then alias this)
> such function would hijack alias this. If not, there is a new case when
> something is going special than at usual cases and only for the purpose
> of writing operator overloading methods outside the body of the type.

The goal must be to get rid of all special behaviour that can result in
strange interactions.
Add the suitable operator function templates to built-in types. Always
rewrite operators to operator function calls. Problem solved.
(And people are already asking for custom constant folding procedures,
even without having this in place to use as a supporting argument.)